Cited by 86Free Will and AgencyMotor Control and AdaptationNeurological disorders and treatments

The medial frontal-prefrontal network for altered awareness and control of action in corticobasal syndrome

Open access
Wolpe, Noham, Moore, James W., Rae, Charlotte L., Rittman, Timothy, Altena, Ellemarije, Haggard, Patrick, Rowe, James B.·2014·Brain

Abstract

The volitional impairments of alien limb and apraxia are a defining feature of the corticobasal syndrome, but a limited understanding of their neurocognitive aetiology has hampered progress towards effective treatments. Here we combined several key methods to investigate the mechanism of impairments in voluntary action in corticobasal syndrome. We used a quantitative measure of awareness of action that is based on well-defined processes of motor control; structural and functional anatomical information; and evaluation against the clinical volitional disorders of corticobasal syndrome. In patients and healthy adults we measured 'intentional binding', the perceived temporal attraction between voluntary actions and their sensory effects. Patients showed increased binding of the perceived time of actions towards their effects. This increase correlated with the severity of alien limb and apraxia, which we suggest share a core deficit in motor control processes, through reduced precision in voluntary action signals. Structural neuroimaging analyses showed the behavioural variability in patients was related to changes in grey matter volume in pre-supplementary motor area, and changes in its underlying white matter tracts to prefrontal cortex. Moreover, changes in functional connectivity at rest between the pre-supplementary motor area and prefrontal cortex were proportional to changes in binding. These behavioural, structural and functional results converge to reveal the frontal network for altered awareness and control of voluntary action in corticobasal syndrome, and provide candidate markers to evaluate new therapies.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/brain/awt302

Cites

73 of 73 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Increased connectivity values were detected in specific FTD variants: parietal lobe connections in bvFTD, frontal lobe in CBS, occipital lobe in PSP, and structural thalamic tract connectivity in bvFTD and svPPA.

    “We also detected increased connectivity values in specific FTD variants, for example, in the connections involving the parietal lobe in bvFTD (Meijboom et al., 2017; Whitwell et al., 2011b), the frontal lobe in CBS (Wolpe et al., 2014), occipital lobe in PSP (Whitwell et al., 2011a), and structural thalamic tract connectivity in bvFTD and svPPA.”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 74 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Wolpe, N., Moore, J. W., Rae, C. L., Rittman, T., Altena, E., Haggard, P., & Rowe, J. B.
Affiliations
  • MRC Cognition and Brain Sciences Unit (GB)
  • University College London (GB)
  • University of Cambridge (GB)
Corresponding author
Wolpe, Noham
Venue
Brain
Published
2013-11-29
Volume
137
Issue
1
Pages
208-220
ISSN
  • 0006-8950 (ISSN-L)
  • 1460-2156
OpenAlex
W2105407889
Cited by
86
References
74
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 10 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 8 · 2017: 12 · 2016: 9 · 2015: 6 · 2014: 7
FWCI
4.02
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
  • Brain (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Goldsmiths Research Online (acceptedVersion)
  • HAL (submittedVersion)
  • UCL Discovery (University College London) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • James S. McDonnell Foundation
  • Wellcome Trust (088324)
  • National Institute for Health and Care Research
  • Cambridge University Hospitals
  • Medical Research Council (MC_US_A060_0016)
  • Economic and Social Research Council (ES/J023140/1)
  • NIHR Cambridge Biomedical Research Centre
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Free Will and Agency
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Motor Control and Adaptation
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Neurology › Neurological disorders and treatments
Keywords
corticobasal syndrome, apraxia, intentional binding, pre-supplementary motor area, prefrontal cortex, functional connectivity, gray matter volume, white matter tracts
MeSH terms
Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Apraxias, Awareness, Female, Frontal Lobe, Humans, Image Processing, Computer-Assisted, Functional Laterality, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Male, Middle Aged, Movement Disorders, Nerve Net, Neuropsychological Tests, Psychomotor Performance, Syndrome, Prefrontal Cortex, Diffusion Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Alien Limb Phenomenon

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review